Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7899542" data-attributes="member: 42582">My response to this is to reiterate what I said upthread: people can desire whatever they want, but once they start saying WotC should do such-and-such or suggesting that their desire gives WotC a reason to do such-and-such, to me they often seem often seem to lose touch.I mean, I'd love WotC to abandon 5e and start developing 4e in a serious way again, cleaning up wonky mechanics (like the rules for setting PC ACs) and cleaning out the dross. But if I posted a thread saying that that's what WotC should do, I would be rightly laughed at and the suggestion derided.Someone else's nostalgia for <insert setting here> is no different from mine for 4e. It bears no connection to WotC's reasons for making commercial publication decisions.If an individual won't buy a 4e setting book because s/he is worried about the potential fracture (of him-/herslef? His/her table? The community?) then that's not my problem.As to why someone should do it - well, of course they're not obliged to but frankly if someone wants to play Dark Sun it seems the rational thing to do. When I wanted to play Greyhawk using the Rolemaster engine I didn't sit around waiting for TSR to license GH to Iron Crown Enterprises. I bought 1st end and 2nd ed AD&D material for GH and used that! A map of the sewers under the City of Greyhawk works as well in RM as in AD&D. The information about Tyr, and the city map, found in the 4e Dark Sun book will work just as well for running 5e adventures. Other than psionics, the rules adaptations required are the ones I mentioned upthread and maybe one or two others (there's a nice weapon breakage rule that I think could easily be used in 5e).</blockquote>

Verification